Dr. Jobe Martin lays out literal Genesis creation

[LiveInSpirit]

YouTube - Dr. Jobe Martin discussing Genesis creation on Wretched Radio

 

[the particular baptist]

Todd Friel is alright. I dig him and occasionally listen to his podcast. Have you seen him debate atheists ? He eats their lunch

 

[Ave Maria]

Pretty cool. And he's right, the scripture can't be any more clear. Let's look at one of the days in Genesis.

(Genesis 1:5 NIV) God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning--the first day.

Emphasis mine.

There was evening and there was morning, the first day. How can it get any clearer than that???

 

[brinny]

YouTube - Dr. Jobe Martin discussing Genesis creation on Wretched Radio

love it. Especially the fact that he's a former evolutionist

 

[jarrettcpr]

Okay, seems this guy is a strict literalist, especially with regards to the creation account. So, hopefully it will be safe for me to assume that he's a Young Earth Creationist (YEC).

With that said I will try and find some errors in his statements.

First, he says each day was half light and half dark and if we were to believe each day was a billion years each... so that would mean 500 million years of darkness followed by 500 million years of light would mess up photosynthesis.

Well we see that plants were already formed before visible light (on earth) came to be. So, that totally destroys the argument about photosynthesis.

The thing is we see the appearance of light after plants (which need photosynthesis) were created.

In day 4 God allowed light to be visible on earth (Gen 1:15), yet on day 3 God made plants that sprung forth fruit (Gen 1:11-12).

So for for Dr. Martin to argue the point about photosynthesis is a moot argument. I mean seriously he's going to argue about photosynthesis yet neglect the fact that plants were already created before light was visible on earth.

So, that is one error unless someone can correct me and please do if I'm wrong.

I don't know if I'm being pedantic here, but he says the Hebrew word Yom always means a day and no one even questions it anywhere in the Bible. He then makes some valid points about Jonah and Ester. However, he is still completely wrong in that Yom always means a day and that no one questions it. Please look below and you'll see for yourselves that Yom is translated in the Bible to mean an array of things ....

Hebrew Dictionaries

Let’s start with the possible meanings of Yom;

The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (1980, Moody Press)

"It can denote: 1. the period of light (as contrasted with the period of darkness), 2. the period of twenty-four hours, 3. a general vague "time," 4. a point of time, 5. a year (in the plural; I Sam 27:7; Ex 13:10, etc.)."
​

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (symbols omitted)

from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), [often used adv.]:--age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, end, evening, (for)ever(lasting), ever(more), full, life, as long as (...live), even now, old, outlived, perpetually, presently, remaineth, required, season, since, space, then, (process of) time, as at other times, in trouble, weather (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), whole (age), (full) year (-ly), younger
​

As you can see, Hebrew dictionaries attest to the fact that the word Yom is used for anywhere from 12 hours up to a year, and even a vague "time period" of unspecified length.
Other Uses of Yom


Day is not the only translation for the word Yom. Here are some other uses.

Time

It is interesting to note that in 67 verses in the Old Testament, the word Yom is translated into the English word "time." For instance, in Genesis 4:3, it says "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord." In this instance, Yom refers to a growing season, probably several months. Again, in Deuteronomy 10:10, it refers to a "time" equal to forty days. In I Kings 11:42, it says "And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years." In this case, Yom translated as the word "time" is equivalent to a 40 year period.
In Isaiah 30:8, it says "Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever." In this case, Yom is equal to "forever." How long is forever? An infinite number of years...billions upon billions upon billons of years. If Yom can equal trillions of years here, then why not billions of years in Genesis?

Year

Four times in the Old Testament Yom is translated "year." In I Kings 1:1, "David was old and stricken in years..." In 2 Chronicles 21:19, "after the end of two years" and in the very next verse "Thirty and two years old." Finally, in Amos 4:4, "...and your tithes after three years." In each case, Yom represents years, not days.

Age

Eight times in the Old Testament Yom is translated "age." These range from sentences like "stricken in age," meaning old age (Genesis 18:11 and 24:1; Joshua 23:1 and 23:2), and other times it says "old age" (Genesis 21:2, Genesis 21:7). Genesis 47:28 refers to "the whole age of Jacob," therefore yom here refers to an entire lifetime. In Zechariah 8:4, it says old men and women will sit in the streets of Jerusalem, "each with cane in hand because of his age."

Ago

One time Yom is translated "ago." 1 Samuel 9:20 says "As for the donkeys you lost three days ago, ..."

Always

Four times yom is translated as "always," in Deuteronomy 5:29, 6:24, 14:23, and in 2 Chronicles 18:7. Always here can be interpreted as a lifetime...for instance, we are to keep the commandments of the Lord always (Deut. 5:29).

Season

Three times yom is translated "season." In Genesis 40:4, "...and they continued a season in ward." Again, in Joshua 24:7, "dwelt in the wilderness a long season," and in 2 Chronicles 15:3, "...a long season Israel hath been...". In each case yom represents a multi-month period.

Chronicles

When used in conjunction with the word dâbâr, yom is translated "chronicles" (27 times).

Continually

When used in conjunction with kôwl, yom is translated as "continually" (11 times). Once, in Psalm 139:16, it is translated continuance (without the kôwl).

Ever

Ever is used to represent a long period of time, such as in Deuteronomy 19:9, "to walk ever in his ways." Nineteen times Yom is translated "ever." The old testament uses "for ever" instead of the word forever. In sixteen cases of use of the word ever, for is placed before it, indicating a infinite period of time. I will not list them all (consult Strong's Concordance for a full listing) but here is an example. In Psalm 23:6, it says "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever." Here Yom is translated as the final word of this verse, ever. Thus, Yom in this verse, and 16 others, represents eternity.

Evermore

In one instance, when yom is used in conjunction with kôwl, Yom is translated "evermore." Deuteronomy 28:29, "...and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore;" thus representing either a lifetime or eternity.

Word Usage in the Old Testament

As you can see, Yom is used in a wide variety of situations related to the concept of time. Yom is not just for days...it is for time in general. How it is translated depends on the context of its use with other words.
Yom in the Creation Account

Even within the creation account, Yom is used to represent four different time periods.

1. Genesis 1:5 "And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night." Here, Moses uses Yom to indicate a 12-hour period
2. Genesis 1:14 "And God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years." Here, Moses uses Yom to indicate 24-hour days
3. Genesis 2:4 "...in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." Here, Moses uses Yom to indicate the entire creative week.

The fourth usage of Yom in the creation account is in the summary for each of the six creation days, "and there was morning and evening the first day". Yom is used to represent a finite, long period of time, usually either millions or billions of years. To show support for this, consider the uses of Yom by Moses.
Moses Other Uses of Yom

Moses, the author of the first five books of the Bible, and of Psalm 90, used Yom in many different ways.

1. Genesis 4:3 "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord." In this instance, Yom refers to a growing season, probably several months.
2. Genesis 43:9 "...then let me bear the blame for ever." Here, Moses uses Yom to represent eternity
3. Genesis 44:32 "...then I shall bear the blame to my father for ever." Again, Moses uses Yom to represent eternity
4. Deuteronomy 4:40 "...that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the Lord thy God giveth the, for ever." Here Yom represents a physical lifetime
5. Deuteronomy 10:10, "Now I stayed on the mountain forty days and nights, as I did the first time,..." Here, Yom is a "time" equal to forty days.
6. Deuteronomy 18:5 "...to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for ever." Again, Yom is translated as eternity
7. Deuteronomy 19:9 "...to love the Lord thy God, and to walk ever in His ways..." Here, Yom represents a lifetime. As long as we live we are to walk in his ways

As you can see, Moses used the word Yom to represent 12-hours, 24 hours, the creative week, forty days, several months, a lifetime, and eternity. ​

From above it is self evident that the word Yom does in fact mean more than just a day.

Also, Dr. Martin seems to think all theistic evolutionist believe what's known as scientific concordism (Meaning each statement in Genesis 1 must match up perfectly with the theory of evolution)... Which is not true at all.

He then ends by saying the Scripture couldn't be any more clear. Well, hopefully some of you will read the Scripture above and know his arguments are wrong.

I'm a theistic evolutionist, but I'm also orthodox in my interpretation of Scripture believe it or not.

Just when I see stuff that like these videos with guys not telling the whole truth makes me...

 

[brinny]

Okay, seems this guy is a strict literalist, especially with regards to the creation account. So, hopefully it will be safe for me to assume that he's a Young Earth Creationist (YEC).

With that said I will try and find some errors in his statements.

First, he says each day was half light and half dark and if we were to believe each day was a billion years each... so that would mean 500 million years of darkness followed by 500 million years of light would mess up photosynthesis.

Well we see that plants were already formed before visible light (on earth) came to be. So, that totally destroys the argument about photosynthesis.

The thing is we see the appearance of light after plants (which need photosynthesis) were created.

In day 4 God allowed light to be visible on earth (Gen 1:15), yet on day 3 God made plants that sprung forth fruit (Gen 1:11-12).

So for for Dr. Martin to argue the point about photosynthesis is a moot argument. I mean seriously he's going to argue about photosynthesis yet neglect the fact that plants were already created before light was visible on earth.

So, that is one error unless someone can correct me and please do if I'm wrong.

I don't know if I'm being pedantic here, but he says the Hebrew word Yom always means a day and no one even questions it anywhere in the Bible. He then makes some valid points about Jonah and Ester. However, he is still completely wrong in that Yom always means a day and that no one questions it. Please look below and you'll see for yourselves that Yom is translated in the Bible to mean an array of things ....

From above it is self evident that the word Yom does in fact mean more than just a day.

Also, Dr. Martin seems to think all theistic evolutionist believe what's known as scientific concordism (Meaning each statement in Genesis 1 must match up perfectly with the theory of evolution)... Which is not true at all.

He then ends by saying the Scripture couldn't be any more clear. Well, hopefully some of you will read the Scripture above and know his arguments are wrong.

I'm a theistic evolutionist, but I'm also orthodox in my interpretation of Scripture believe it or not.

Just when I see stuff that like these videos with guys not telling the whole truth makes me...

that is your opinion. You're entitled to it, just as i am entitled to mine. I would hope that you didn't post here only to shoot holes in what the OP posted.

You were not present when our Creator created the heavens and the earth. You can theorize, however, your theorizing is im-perfect. That's because you, and the rest of us are im-perfect. We theorize, bump our heads, theorize again, and on throughout history, because we do NOT know ALL there is to know. So we "guess', based on our estimations, and our logic, and "what makes sense to us". The fact is, we do NOT know. We can merely keep "guessing".

The fact is, God, our Creator, WAS there when He formed man out of the dust and breathed His breath of life into him, thereby man became a "living soul".

The bottom line is, if we believe our Creator, our God, did as He said He did, and whether HE is worthy to be trusted, simply because He DOES know ALL things, even as we do not. We are finite. He is not.

I'm believing my Creator.

 

[jarrettcpr]

that is your opinion. You're entitled to it, just as i am entitled to mine. I would hope that you didn't post here only to shoot holes in what the OP posted.

You were not present when our Creator created the heavens and the earth. You can theorize, however, your theorizing is im-perfect. That's because you, and the rest of us are im-perfect. We theorize, bump our heads, theorize again, and on throughout history, because we do NOT know ALL there is to know. So we "guess', based on our estimations, and our logic, and "what makes sense to us". The fact is, we do NOT know. We can merely keep "guessing".

The fact is, God, our Creator, WAS there when He formed man out of the dust and breathed His breath of life into him, thereby man became a "living soul".

The bottom line is, if we believe our Creator, our God, did as He said He did, and whether HE is worthy to be trusted, simply because He DOES know ALL things, even as we do not. We are finite. He is not.

I'm believing my Creator.

Oh no, I'm not here to stir up friction or any trouble.

Just I found fought with Dr. Martin's logic, that's all. IMO, Dr. Martin was arguing about those people who are Christians and believe in evolution (theistic evolutionists) are doing so in err. He argued what it seemed to me those who try to do what's known as scientific concordism (meaning people use the creation account and try to match it up perfectly with the theory of evolution) are wrong b/c it would make photosynthesis and plant life unable to exist.

Dr. Martin argued if we was to beleive the Hebrew word Yom can mean a billion years (for the creation account) than that would mean there would be 500 millions years of darkness and 500 million years of light. He argues that couldn't be possible b/c of photosynthesis and plant life couldn't co-exist.

Yet, the guy totally forgets to mention that plants have already been created and are already bringing forth fruit (Gen 1:11-12) which existed before light appeared or became visible to even allow for photosynthesis to occur on earth (Gen 1:15).

Also, he was simply dead wrong in that the word Yom always means a day. In my above post I used an excerpt from a website that proves my point.

So, IMO he was wrong on two accounts. Making that video untrustworthy and IMO should be deleted from the internet all together.

I'm not saying God is wrong, I'm simply saying Dr. Martin is wrong in this video. That's all.

 

[brinny]

Oh no, I'm not here to stir up friction or any trouble.

Just I found fought with Dr. Martin's logic, that's all. IMO, Dr. Martin was arguing about those people who are Christians and believe in evolution (theistic evolutionists) are doing so in err. He argued what it seemed to me those who try to do what's known as scientific concordism (meaning people use the creation account and try to match it up perfectly with the theory of evolution) are wrong b/c it would make photosynthesis and plant life unable to exist.

Dr. Martin argued if we was to beleive the Hebrew word Yom can mean a billion years (for the creation account) than that would mean there would be 500 millions years of darkness and 500 million years of light. He argues that couldn't be possible b/c of photosynthesis and plant life couldn't co-exist.

Yet, the guy totally forgets to mention that plants have already been created and are already bringing forth fruit (Gen 1:11-12) which existed before light appeared or became visible to even allow for photosynthesis to occur on earth (Gen 1:15).

Also, he was simply dead wrong in that the word Yom always means a day. In my above post I used an excerpt from a website that proves my point.

So, IMO he was wrong on two accounts. Making that video untrustworthy and IMO should be deleted from the internet all together.

I'm not saying God is wrong, I'm simply saying Dr. Martin is wrong in this video. That's all.

in your opinion, it's wrong. if you do not believe what he stated, ignore it. Because you do not believe what he stated is no reason to remove it from the internet. Everyone can decide for theirself what to believe about what he stated.

 

[jarrettcpr]

in your opinion, it's wrong. if you do not believe what he stated, ignore it. Because you do not believe what he stated is no reason to remove it from the internet. Everyone can decide for theirself what to believe about what he stated.

I agree, we should all be entitled to our opinion (once we've done the research to come to our conclusions, and unfortunately many don't and will believe much of everything at face value. I myself am guilty of this), but I just wish all the stuff that is factually incorrect; either logically incorrect or simply misstated facts should be deleted from the Internet.

Though of course that is impossible. I can buy server space to make a website or post a video and argue whatever I wish and be completely wrong (As many do and I constantly find things that are wrong all the time on people's websites). If I had the power I'd either delete the page or have it where on the page says this information if incorrect and stay away at all costs.

It is obvious that some people hold Dr. Martin to some high level and when he makes a video that is wrong both logically (as he was with photosynthesis and plant survival) and factually (as he was about the usage of the word Yom in the Bible) he does a disservice to those who actually watch those videos and believe it as many I'm sure do. Even if it's just one person makes no difference to me. Delete it or at least tell people this guy is wrong before posting it to the world.

If you don't then it is my duty to say why that person is wrong and correct people's opinions on a particular subject. I'm glad when people do the same for me.

Once again I don't want to sound forceful or make friction in here, just I feel strongly about certain things and when I can prove something to be incorrect I should try my best so others can get a different viewpoint.

I had to argue in another forum about a guy who was saying Jesus didn't exist and that he's a myth. I quickly had to reply to his post and try and correct him. It's my duty to at least put out the facts correctly and then let him make a decision.

Just I can't stand it when I see see something blatantly wrong. Like 2 + 2 = 5.

Alright, sorry for the rant. Please forgive me.

 

[the particular baptist]

The liberal rooms can be found elsewhere on this massive site. People who read the bible and believe it should not be browbeaten by liberals in the Baptist room.

 

[jarrettcpr]

The liberal rooms can be found elsewhere on this massive site. People who read the bible and believe it should not be brow beaten by liberals in the Baptist room.

Actually, I'm very conservative and libertarian. Both politically and biblically. If you read this thread I actually made sure to write down that biblically that I'm indeed orthodox.

Just to address your post this has nothing to do about beating on people who believe the Bible.

Thing is I actually cited the Bible to prove my point as to why Dr. Martin was wrong (I also used reason). Now if you can refute my claims other than making ad hominem attacks in trying to say I'm liberal which I can't stand liberals (though I love 'em) and instead of arguing that I'm brow beating someone than we might get somewhere.

 

[LiveInSpirit]

Oh no, I'm not here to stir up friction or any trouble.

Yet, the guy totally forgets to mention that plants have already been created and are already bringing forth fruit (Gen 1:11-12)

You are incorrect. Back up to Genesis 1:3,4,5
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

Light was already on the earth as well as darkness. That marks your first point moot.

Regarding Yom, Yom is used as "day" more than 90% of the time in the texts. Using Yom with day and night makes no sense textually. If Yom was to refer to an "age" or "era" or "season" there would be no need for the clarification of evening and morning.

 

[jarrettcpr]

You are incorrect. Back up to Genesis 1:3,4,5
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

Light was already on the earth as well as darkness. That marks your first point moot.

Regarding Yom, Yom is used as "day" more than 90% of the time in the texts. Using Yom with day and night makes no sense textually. If Yom was to refer to an "age" or "era" or "season" there would be no need for the clarification of evening and morning.

Alright, Thank you for the Scripture.

Yes, God made light at the beginning and simply defined that light = day and dark = night.

Now with that fact known, no where does it actually say that light was on earth until God specified it here...

"And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day." (Genesis 1:14-19)

It is clear that light had not actually touched the earth until the forth day.

I'm not arguing if in this particular case (the creation account) if Yom is used properly. I'm arguing that Dr. Martin when he said that Yom with a number around it always means normal day. That is just simply factually wrong. I used the excerpt from a website that proves it.

One example to verify my claim is look up the Strong concordance (for the word Yom it is H3117) and read 2 Chronicles 21:19. You'll see that Yom is used to mean a process of time and years. The Hebrew word Yom is used twice in that one verse.

 

[LiveInSpirit]

Yes, God made light at the beginning and simply defined that light = day and dark = night.

Now with that fact known, no where does it actually say that light was on earth until God specified it here...(Genesis 1:14-19

It is clear that light had not actually touched the earth until the forth day.

It absolutely does say light was on earth before Gen. 1:14.

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.



I am very confused as to how you can deny that there was light before the creation of the sun and moon. There was darkness, then God spoke light into existence. It plainly shows it, if you read it LITERALLY.

If you don't think that God has/will provided light without the sun or moon please look at Revelation 21: 22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it,for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light.

And I also ask that you look at 2 Corinthians 4:6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[jarrettcpr]

It absolutely does say light was on earth before Gen. 1:14.

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5God called the light day, and the darkness He called night And there was evening and there was morning, one day.



I am very confused as to how you can deny that there was light before the creation of the sun and moon. There was darkness, then God spoke light into existence. It plainly shows it, if you read it LITERALLY.

If you don't think that God has/will provided light without the sun or moon please look at Revelation 21: 22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it,for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light.

And I also ask that you look at 2 Corinthians 4:6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

I believe your grasping at straws. I used Scripture that clearly said light had not touched earth until the fourth day. I'm not denying there wasn't light before the fourth day, just on earth there was no light.

Once again...

"And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day." (Genesis 1:14-19)

Really, I should just bold and underline the whole Scripture. See the thing is even though God made light, the light wasn't visible from earth until the fourth day. No where before those verses does it say light was on earth. It is all speculation. However we don't have to speculate, but instead we have cold hard proof that only till the fourth day did light hit the earth.

So, you will agree with me that Dr. Martin was in fact wrong when he said that Yom with a number around it always means normal day? Once again to verify my claim look up the Strong concordance (for the word Yom it is H3117) and read 2 Chronicles 21:19. For now you can give me that and next you can agree that light didn't hit earth until the fourth day.

 

[LiveInSpirit]

Where in 14-19 does it say "and light was not on the earth" ???

God provided the light, then He created the sun and moon to take over.
I'm not grasping at straws friend, just trying to open your eyes with supporting scripture.

I have proven my Yom point. I don't care if Dr. Martin is right or wrong. I'll say he's wrong just to humor you.

 

[Ave Maria]

The liberal rooms can be found elsewhere on this massive site. People who read the bible and believe it should not be browbeaten by liberals in the Baptist room.

Amen! Preach it brother!

 

[jarrettcpr]

Where in 14-19 does it say "and light was not on the earth" ???

God provided the light, then He created the sun and moon to take over.
I'm not grasping at straws friend, just trying to open your eyes with supporting scripture.

See, I can play this game as well and ask you where does in say in verses before 14-19 that there was light on earth?

It says by specifically pointed that God created the stars to give light to earth. How can you give something that is already given. It's like a doctor telling me he's giving me a polio vaccine after he already gave me one. I'm horrible at analogies, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying. It's simply just not logically sound.

"and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so" (Genesis 1:15)

If that verse would have said to give more light on earth or something like that I'd stop arguing but it doesn't.

I have proven my Yom point. I don't care if Dr. Martin is right or wrong. I'll say he's wrong just to humor you.

I was stating a fact that Dr. Martin was wrong when he made the sure fire statement that the word Yom with a number around it always means normal day? Once again to verify my claim look up the Strong concordance (for the word Yom it is H3117) and read 2 Chronicles 21:19.

It has nothing to do with humoring me, it's just that I've been spending a good bit of time just to at least prove one fact.

 

[LiveInSpirit]

See, I can play this game as well and ask you where does in say in verses before 14-19 that there was light on earth?

It says it right here!!!

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from
the darkness.

Equation : Only darkness + "let there be light" + separated the light from the darkness = day (light) and night (darkness)

There is your light on earth!

Yes, the moon and sun give light, but 2-4 shows that there was already light and darkness because God "separated the light from the darkness". That verse qualifies that there was not only darkness but light and darkness.

 

[jarrettcpr]

It says it right here!!!

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
3Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light.
4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from
the darkness.

Equation : Only darkness + "let there be light" + separated the light from the darkness = day (light) and night (darkness)

There is your light on earth!

Yes, the moon and sun give light, but 2-4 shows that there was already light and darkness because God "separated the light from the darkness". That verse qualifies that there was not only darkness but light and darkness.

Yes, now show me where light was on earth? You're simply telling me that there was indeed light. You also tell me there was now separation of light and darkness. I know this. I am asking were does it ever say that light was on earth before verses 14-19?

It doesn't. Only until God creates the stars does he give light to earth.

"and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so" (Genesis 1:15)